But yes, in general cartoons used to have deeper storylines. And even if they weren't always deep, they were clever (i.e. Scooby Doo).

Click to expand...

I beg to differ, actually. Some of today's cartoons are amazingly deep. The new TMNT show, for a while, anyway, every single episode had some sort of small consequence that led to a much bigger story later on. The secret origins arc was a prime example. The turtles get tangled up in a big space plot line, and they meet a robot woth the brain of a scientist merged into it's programming called "The Fugitoid." Somehow, it accidentally gets transported with the turtles back to Earth. And a later plot line, which developed into a bigger arc had a race of alien dinosaurs called the "Triceritons" invading Earth trying to find it, even though he wasn't there. And that lead to the Bishop arc....

And Spectacular Spider-Man, every episode had some sort of consequence that lead to bigger things in each passing episode. Peter trying to juggle 2 different personalities alone caused half his friends to hate him, leading to one of his friends becoming Venom...

My all time favorite Scooby was A Pup Named Scooby Doo, I loved it's running gags and how it was more comedy based. It is a big reason why even now Velma is my favorite character and as adults I ship her and Shaggy in my mind .

Click to expand...

You too? It feels like the creators would rather ship them with anyone else but each other, with the way they handle it these days. But in the original series, I think they implied they were a "sort of" couple, if only because they were always dancing together or something I don't know, that's how I saw it as a kid. I haven't been able to shake it since.

Anyway, A Pup Named Scooby Doo is really fun, and while I don't specifically remember watching it (I probably did, I just don't remember), I consider it a part of my childhood. Cartoon Networks airs the reruns in the morning now, I believe.

After the wildly animated and funny Mighty Mouse, the New Adventures aired in the 80's, other cartoon studios tried to copy that style and made crazy, off the wall, cartoony cartoons like A Pup Named Scooby Doo and the short lived new Beany and Cecil Show. And then came Ren and Stimpy.

The Bugs Bunny and Tweety Show... now that brings me WAY back. I vaguely remember it, but the memories are fond ones. When I was really little, our TV could only pick up two or three channels. I remember watching that show. Then it seems like later we couldn't get ABC, but we could get channels like Nick and the Disney Channel. It was weird.

When I say relatively new, I mean it's developed in the past 30 years or so. If you look at cartoons, comics, or films pre-80s, you really don't see that type of character. Or, if there were such a thing, I think it would have been to quirky to be considered a label.

After the wildly animated and funny Mighty Mouse, the New Adventures aired in the 80's, other cartoon studios tried to copy that style and made crazy, off the wall, cartoony cartoons like A Pup Named Scooby Doo and the short lived new Beany and Cecil Show. And then came Ren and Stimpy.

Click to expand...

Thay's is true. But as I remember it, A Pup Named Scooby Doo And The New Adventures Of Mighty Mouseis come out the same year as each other. Just pointing that out. But Ren and Stimpy and Mighty mouse were both John K. Creations. *shrugs*

Caricatures are fine with me in cartoons, just as long as they aren't sending off a negative image to kids, particularly girls.

Click to expand...

Ph . Makeup, clothing, and weight loss ads are ten times worst than cartoons could ever be IMHO. With cartoons you can not take them as seriously if your parents say so because they are not 'real'. But with those ads with supermodels and stars edited to look even thinner and more perfect than they really are, even though they are just as made up, little girls take them to heart because they look real...At least, I know I did . Luckily, I never got body issues (besides hating the pores on my nose, but everyones got something like that)

As far as labels of girls in cartoons go, even if they can be labeled I just don't see them in terms of labels. I ether like them or I don't, the label is often beside the point because I judge them by how fun, or not, their character is to watch and go on adventures with.

The funny thing is, when cartoon and comic book makers try to change a female character to get rid of these 'label-like 'character details often IMHO the character suffers if it was good to start with..they almost get a flat cardbroady feeling to their personality. I think this comes from trying to please too many outside voices and not just doing what is good for the story itself...

I know I fit into a few labels even if I don't live by them, and if you were to take away those parts of me you would be left with a pretty boring person. The same goes for characters I think

Ph . Makeup, clothing, and weight loss ads are ten times worst than cartoons could ever be IMHO. With cartoons you can not take them as seriously if your parents say so because they are not 'real'. But with those ads with supermodels and stars edited to look even thinner and more perfect than they really are, even though they are just as made up, little girls take them to heart because they look real...At least, I know I did . Luckily, I never got body issues (besides hating the pores on my nose, but everyones got something like that)

Click to expand...

Oh definitely real life ads cause trouble too. But Bratz dolls and their various incarnations are way too thin, not a great body image to give. And the characters are held up as come kind of ideal, "real" or not. The only thing I like about them if how their movie spoke against cliques.